DEI in public education: Texas House committee considers ban in K-12 schools
Senate Bill 12, dubbed a "parental rights bill," also seeks to tighten parental notification requirements regarding issues like changes to a child's mental or physical health, criminal offenses, uncertified teacher assignments, or sex education.
The effort to limit DEI in public schools mirrors a similar push in 2023 to ban DEI in public universities and colleges in Texas. That 2023 law, SB 17, reshaped equity-based student support practices in higher education, led to university staff layoffs and dismantled offices meant to help minority students. The Trump administration is also seeking to strip DEI from the federal government, including in education.
During the House Committee on Public Educating hearing on the bill, Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, said that SB 12, passed by the Senate in March, aims to provide parents greater oversight of their children's education. Leach is sponsoring the bill by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, in the House.
'I am concerned when it comes to our history and being inclusive in that history,' said Rep. Gina Hinojosa, D-Austin.
When Hinojosa asked if a school lesson about Harvey Milk — the first openly gay man elected to public office in California — would violate the bill, Leach told her no.
Hinojosa also noted that when lawmakers talk about banning DEI, they need to be clear about exactly what that means for teachers.
'They need to have a specific understanding of what is prohibited in their jobs,' Hinojosa said.
Rep. John Bryant, a Dallas Democrat, pushed back on the fact that the bill would prohibit districts from specifically seeking minority teachers for schools that serve primarily minority students.
'Don't you agree that some considerations should be given to trying to have a faculty in school that looks a little bit like the student population there?' Bryant asked.
Leach instead maintained that schools should be conducting their hiring practices based on merit and qualifications alone.
'This is about performance and achievement and instruction, and very strongly stands against and prohibits discriminatory practices,' Leach said.
The House version of SB 12 cut out a limit on district-sponsored student clubs that are 'based on sexual orientation or gender identity,' Leach said Tuesday.
While education advocates said this was a good move, they still fear the bill might limit minority and LGBTQ+ students' access to information and resources about their communities.
Ash Hall, policy and advocacy strategist on LGBTQIA+ rights at ACLU of Texas, said the bill would mandate that educators disclose personal information about a student's identity, even without the student's consent. Hall said SB 12 could also lead to classroom censorship.
'This bill creates red tape and compliance burdens that distract schools from teaching and learning,' Hall said during a news conference Tuesday. 'It is not about improving education. It is about controlling it.'
During the news conference, Rep. Ron Reynolds, D-Missouri City, called the bill a further attack on minority and LGBTQ+ students and said Texas should be celebrating diversity.
'If passed, this bill would undermine educators by giving parents complete control over their students' education and strip students of their personal autonomy and privacy, force school staff to out their students to their parents, limit educators' ability to tailor their lessons due to vague language, (and) effectively ban district staff and contractors from carrying out DEI duties,' Reynolds said.
The committee left the bill pending Tuesday.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas House panel weighs DEI ban in public schools
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
13 minutes ago
- Fox News
Removing DEI from military schools is a ‘move towards meritocracy': Attorney
Constitutional attorney Mark Smith discusses the Department of Justice's lawsuits alleging use of DEI at military schools on 'Fox Report.'
CNN
30 minutes ago
- CNN
Judge blocks Trump administration guidance against DEI programs at schools and colleges
AP — A federal judge on Thursday struck down two Trump administration actions aimed at eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the nation's schools and universities. In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland found that the Education Department violated the law when it threatened to cut federal funding from educational institutions that continued with DEI initiatives. The guidance has been on hold since April when three federal judges blocked various portions of the Education Department's anti-DEI measures. The ruling Thursday followed a motion for summary judgment from the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association, which challenged the government's actions in a February lawsuit. The case centers on two Education Department memos ordering schools and universities to end all 'race-based decision-making' or face penalties up to a total loss of federal funding. It's part of a campaign to end practices the Trump administration frames as discrimination against white and Asian American students. The new ruling orders the department to scrap the guidance because it runs afoul of procedural requirements, though Gallagher wrote that she took no view on whether the policies were 'good or bad, prudent or foolish, fair or unfair.' Gallagher, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, rejected the government's argument that the memos simply served to remind schools that discrimination is illegal. 'It initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished,' Gallagher wrote. Democracy Forward, a legal advocacy firm representing the plaintiffs, called it an important victory over the administration's attack on DEI. 'Threatening teachers and sowing chaos in schools throughout America is part of the administration's war on education, and today the people won,' said Skye Perryman, the group's president and CEO. A statement from the Education Department on Thursday said it was disappointed in the ruling but that 'judicial action enjoining or setting aside this guidance has not stopped our ability to enforce Title VI protections for students at an unprecedented level.' The conflict started with a Feb. 14 memo declaring that any consideration of race in admissions, financial aid, hiring or other aspects of academic and student life would be considered a violation of federal civil rights law. The memo dramatically expanded the government's interpretation of a 2023 Supreme Court decision barring colleges from considering race in admissions decisions. The government argued the ruling applied not only to admissions but across all of education, forbidding 'race-based preferences' of any kind. 'Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon 'systemic and structural racism' and advanced discriminatory policies and practices,' wrote Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary of the department's Office for Civil Rights. A further memo in April asked state education agencies to certify they were not using 'illegal DEI practices.' Violators risked losing federal money and being prosecuted under the False Claims Act, it said. In total, the guidance amounted to a full-scale reframing of the government's approach to civil rights in education. It took aim at policies that were created to address longstanding racial disparities, saying those practices were their own form of discrimination. The memos drew a wave of backlash from states and education groups that called it illegal government censorship. In its lawsuit, the American Federation of Teachers said the government was imposing 'unclear and highly subjective' limits on schools across the country. It said teachers and professors had to 'choose between chilling their constitutionally protected speech and association or risk losing federal funds and being subject to prosecution.'
Los Angeles Times
42 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
It's time to save the whales again
Diving in a kelp forest in Monterey Bay recently, I watched a tubby 200-pound harbor seal follow a fellow diver, nibbling on his flippers. The diver, a graduate student, was using sponges to collect DNA samples from the ocean floor. Curious seals, he told me, can be a nuisance. When he bags his sponges and places them in his collection net, they sometimes bite into them, puncturing the bags and spoiling his samples. Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, coming closer than 50 yards to seals and dolphins is considered harassment, but they're free to harass you, which seems only fair given the centuries of deadly whaling and seal hunting that preceded a generational shift in how we view the world around us. The shift took hold in 1969, the year a massive oil spill coated the Santa Barbara coastline and the Cuyahoga River, in Cleveland, caught fire. Those two events helped spark the first Earth Day, in 1970, and the shutdown of America's last whaling station in 1971. Protecting the environment from pollution and from loss of wilderness and wildlife quickly moved from a protest issue to a societal ethic as America's keystone environmental legislation was passed at around the same time, written by a Democratic Congress and signed into law by a Republican president, Richard Nixon. Those laws include the National Environmental Policy Act (1969) , the Clean Air Act (1970), the Clean Water Act (1972) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972), which goes further than the Endangered Species Act (1973) in protecting all marine mammals, not just threatened ones, from harassment, killing or capture by U.S. citizens in U.S. waters and on the high seas. All these 'green' laws and more are under attack by the Trump administration, its congressional minions and longtime corporate opponents of environmental protections, including the oil and gas industry. Republicans' disingenuous argument for weakening the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act is that the legislation has worked so well in rebuilding wildlife populations that it's time to loosen regulations for a better balance between nature and human enterprise. When it comes to marine mammal populations, that premise is wrong. On July 22, at a House Natural Resources subcommittee meeting, Republican Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska introduced draft legislation that would scale back the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Among other things, his proposal would limit the ability of the federal government to take action against 'incidental take,' the killing of whales, dolphins and seals by sonic blasts from oil exploration, ship and boat strikes or by drowning as accidental catch (also known as bycatch) in fishing gear. Begich complained that marine mammal protections interfere with 'essential projects like energy development, port construction, and even fishery operations.' Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), the ranking member on the House Resources Committee, calls the legislation a 'death sentence' for marine mammals. It's true that the marine mammal law has been a success in many ways. Since its passage, no marine mammal has gone extinct and some species have recovered dramatically. The number of northern elephant seals migrating to California beaches to mate and molt grew from 10,000 in 1972 to about 125,000 today. There were an estimated 11,000 gray whales off the West Coast when the Marine Mammal Protection Act became law; by 2016, the population peaked at 27,000. But not all species have thrived. Historically there were about 20,000 North Atlantic right whales off the Eastern Seaboard. They got their name because they were the 'right' whales to harpoon — their bodies floated for easy recovery after they were killed. In 1972 they were down to an estimated 350 individuals. After more than half a century of federal legal protection, the population is estimated at 370. They continue to suffer high mortality rates from ship strikes, entanglement in fishing gear and other causes, including noise pollution and greater difficulty finding prey in warming seas. Off Florida, a combination of boat strikes and algal pollution threaten some 8,000-10,000 manatees. The population's recovery (from about 1,000 in 1979) has been significant enough to move them off the endangered species list in 2017, but since the beginning of this year alone, nearly 500 have died. Scientists would like to see them relisted, but at least they're still covered by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. A 2022 study in the Gulf of Mexico found that in areas affected by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill 12 years earlier, the dolphin population had declined 45% and that it might take 35 years to recover. In the Arctic Ocean off Alaska, loss of sea ice is threatening polar bears (they're considered marine mammals), bowhead and beluga whales, walruses, ringed seals and harp seals. On the West Coast the number of gray whales — a Marine Mammal Act success story and now a cautionary tale — has crashed by more than half in the last decade to fewer than 13,000, according to a recent report by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, the nation's lead ocean agency, is an endangered species in its own right in the Trump era). Declining prey, including tiny shrimp-like amphipods, in the whales' summer feeding grounds in the Arctic probably caused by warming water are thought to be a major contributor to their starvation deaths and reduced birth rates. The whale's diving numbers are just one signal that climate change alone makes maintaining the Marine Mammal Act urgent. Widespread marine heat waves linked to a warming ocean are contributing to the loss of kelp forests that sea otters and other marine mammals depend on. Algal blooms off California, and for the first time ever, Alaska, supercharged by warmer waters and nutrient pollution, are leading to the deaths of thousands of dolphins and sea lions. What the Trump administration and its antiregulation, anti-environmental-protection supporters fail to recognize is that the loss of marine mammals is an indicator for the declining health of our oceans and the natural world we depend on and are a part of. This time, saving the whales will be about saving ourselves. David Helvarg is executive director of Blue Frontier, an ocean policy group. His next book, 'Forest of the Sea: The Remarkable Life and Imperiled Future of Kelp,' is scheduled to be published in 2026.
